The new rule for 2014 awarding double points for the final race, announced by the FIA after an F1 Commission meeting earlier this month, may be dropped before the season even starts.

The idea has not attracted many supporters, with drivers, many fans and even Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo against it. Montezemolo has invited all the F1 teams to Maranello in 2014 to discuss long term strategy for the sport and this will be one of the talking points.

Meanwhile the new F1 Strategy Group, featuring the leading teams, will meet in the New Year, for the first time since the wider reaction to the double points rule became clear.

Bernie Ecclestone, who has been a keen supporter of the idea, has said that he would like to see the final three races awarded double points, to really keep life in the championship and has said it may come down to this “or nothing”.

But the really powerful opposition has come from promoters of other Grands Prix on the 19 race calendar, who have been on the phone to Ecclestone since the announcement, questioning the justification for the final race, in Abu Dhabi, to be considered “more important” than their race.

Bernie wants his tv audiences which is falling and treat us real fans with such insults and thinks he can get away with some cheap lucky draws. Of late he seems desparate trying to float his stocks and with his court case or cases so his kers and drs have been activated.

Despite the turbo kicking in I've been trying to book for the Sepang race and can't even get through the site for days...wt*

This is more than just Bernie. The so called 'Strategy Group' agreed it, as did the FIA. Although it has created a talking point, it has made the sport a joke, and it's even worse if it's reversed less than two months after it was decided.

Bernie, the Strategy Group and the FIA might get what they're looking for if they limited teams budgets and had a fair prize structure.

The other 17 circuits, Monaco excluded, should have phoned Bernie and said they are only going to pay half of their race hosting fees as they are only worth half of Abu Dhabi. That would make him choke in his cornflakes while he's reading the bill for his legal fees.

Shambolic is the correct word. What was obvious to fans, driver, journalists etc makes a mockery of what Bernie and his lapdog group voted in. It really shows up poor management. You can't say it's Bernie trying to make headlines in the offseason as these headlines turn sponsors away..

James, have you any thoughts on Autosports great idea of banning pits to car radio? easy to administer and puts the driver back in control. It would end 'managed' races...

it may not make the tyre less durable but how many times was vettel asked to slow down because he was over heating the tyres.... If he wasnt given this information he wouldnt have slowed. Thats a big performance gain. The drivers would have to regulate tyre ware themselves.

I think some of his recent decisions could be filed under "ridiculous".

Given the failures of India, Korea and the debacle that is this New Jersey GP, his position must surely be called into question. F1 may be in his complete control right now but this is a fans sport like all others and the fans are clearly becoming disillusioned with the direction F1 has been headed.

Entering markets that have showed no interest, enthusiasm or fan base, who knows what Russia will be like next year. Add to that these gimmicks like double points for the final race, DRS etc. It's all getting a bit too much and is taking away from the purity of Formula 1.

And finally, no longer can F1 be described as the pinnacle of motorsport. GP2 cars could well be a match in terms of pace compared to F1 next year. How and why has F1 been forced to become slower and slower over the last decade. All the lap records from long standing tracks were set in the 2004 season and currently, the cars are running around over 5 seconds a lap slower. Downforce levels are being hacked away at with the new regulations as well and we'll have cars changing gear at 11-12,000 rpm .

F1 is going backwards and costing more money to do so amazingly. And these Bernie gimmicks are not helping. He needs to stand aside in my view. F1 needs a new leader.

15k, which is only 3k less than now. Plus they've got turbos + ERS, so they'll have more HP than now! And less aero downforce means more sliding and more work for the driver. I'm up for a new set of rules - the second half of 2013 was the most boring period of racing since 2004.

I was starting to turn the tv off and havnt done that since the schumacker days.

Turbo cars do not need high rpm to make huge power as boost pressure develops a huge amount of torque. The 4 cylinder bmw engine of the late 80s had 1300hp in qualifying and didnt rev anywhere near 18k. Sad we will not see this kind of hp again though due to the 100ltr limit placed on fuel consumption. Im sure they will make up near 850hp though.

The fastest ever laps of Silvertsone, India and Catalunya were all set just last season, and most of the tracks on the calendar have their record laps held by either 2010, 2011 or 2013 cars.

The sprint race format of 2004 has meant that fastest race laps were faster back then than now sort, but so what?

The 2010 Red Bull RB6 could take corners such as Copse, Turn 9 at Catalunya and Turn 8 at Turkey completely flat out and is arguably the fastest car in F1 history, certainly in terms of cornering ability. Slow enough for you?

It isn't as if F1 is alone in this quest to slow cars down. LMP1 cars have just about half the power of the Group C cars of the late 80's and early 90's, and are still nowhere near as fast as the Peugeot 908 HDi of 2008-2010 was.

Despite this, nothing - and I mean nothing comes close to F1. Unless you propose F1 is suddenly going to become 8-10 seconds a lap slower than now, you shouldn't worry about it being slower than GP2, which itself is still faster than any other circuit racing class, including LMP1.

I'm still trying to come to terms with your response here as it is so baffling!!

"The fastest ever laps of Silvertsone, India and Catalunya were all set just last season, and most of the tracks on the calendar have their record laps held by either 2010, 2011 or 2013 cars."

As I stated in my original post, I am comparing track times to circuits which have been on the calendar right the way through. That also means unaltered! Silverstone clearly doesn't count sue to the layout changes and why you think India was on the calendar then or feel the need to confirm that the fastest lap was not set there in 2004 (when it wasn't even built) is ridiculous.

Let me state some facts for you, which proves my point beyond a shadow of a doubt....

Italian GP 2004, pole position 1.20.089

Italian GP 2013, pole position 1.23.755

Italian GP 2004, fastest race lap, 1.21.046

Italian GP 2013, fastest race lap, 1.25.849

We can quibble over the reasons why (full tanks, aero tanks, smaller engines etc). All those reasons would be more or less correct but the basic stand alone point rings true.

F1 is getting slower!!! And will get even slower again in 2014.... and by the bucket load at the start. People who frequent GP and go to the same race and grandstand every year will notice a very big difference in the last decade. You can tell with the naked eye never mind breaking out the stop watch.

And as for taking fast corners flat out as you mentioned, you have a point I will concede. However, I could easily take all of those corners flat out in my road car as I'd be going much slower. It's the same principle transposed. Part of the reason they could take copse flat out as opposed to 2004 is because they arrived at the corner at much less speed. Of course the levels of downforce in 2013 was higher than 2004 as well. No doubt. But the raw speed is just not there anymore and I don't believe that F1 is going the right way in slowing F1 down even further.

One final example, Spa 2000, Hakkinen overtakes Schumacher going around Zonta on the Kemmel straight doing 205 MPH. 2013 top speeds along the Kemmel straight..... in the region of 195MPH.

Don't know if that would be one of your complaints, but I don't think 7th-10th place deserve any points at all. I liked the system in the early 80's , 9-6-4-3-2-1 WITH discards. Consistency has been way overvalued since then IMO.

I liked that one, too. I was able to easily calculate drivers potential championship positions and points advantage/deficits as the races unfolded, even after a couple of beers. With the current system, while I certainly could do it in my head if I choose to, it just seems a bit *too* much effort to bother with.

I had a thought today about points. Keep each and every race at what we have now. But extra points are gained or lost depending on how many places are gained or lost in the race. Example: Alonso starts second and wins. Vettel starts on pole and finishs second. Alonso would get 25 points + 1 point and Vettel would get 18 points, but minus one for dropping a place. It would take a bit of computing for all 10 place getters but hey, it's an idea I had. Did any of that make sense? 🙂

LOL... I'm over the moon my "stupid as Bernies" idea generated discussion. New idea, qualifying is drawn out of a hat and that free'd up hour on Saturday arvo is used for final race set up, or burnout practice.

How about the organisers drop different coloured balloons on the track at random intervals and drivers can aim for them scoring points as they hit them: 2 points for a blue; -3 for a green (punishment for being anti-green) -1 point for the car ahead for a red; -2 for the car behind for a yellow; and automatic disqualification for Sebastian Vettell for a red+blue+red combonation from any 3 drivers in a row!

I've given thought to a similar for a few years now. My idea only awards a single WC point each race to the driver who makes up the most places yet still finishes outside the points. A single point doesnt sound much but it makes a considerable to the team at the end of the season. In the event of a tie (very likely), the driver who started farthest back is awarded the point. It might need refinement but it sounds reasonable to me, without being anything extreme.

Vettel could decide to change the diapers of his baby rather than doing quali and win anyway. 25 points + 21 for position wins the first 6 races. Alonso and Hamilton colide at the first six starts when starting from the front row and get minus 100 points in these races....

As amusing as it would be to see a driver 40+ points back trying to qualify last at Abu Dhabi, this seems like it might be a bit silly. It punishes drivers who qualify well, which is definitely not ideal.

Of course it makes a difference, your competitors gain points over you and you get minus points. So you're leading a race and drop out due to mechanical failure and end up on minus 19 points. Everyone else gets one point for passing you. You start the next race 20 points down. That is a difference, is it not?

So in your analysis a very fast car starting from back of the grid (due to penalty) and finishing high at the end of the race (say second or third) could get more points than a car who actually won the race from the pole!

I really wonder what the impetus was for this idea? It all sounds so half baked. Bernie and Co. really didn't expect to hear complaints from other race promoters? Nobody thought to market test the idea before making it a rule (whether through official market research or leaking the idea to the media)? I suppose it may've been a ploy to keep people talking about the sport during the off season. If so, it's a shockingly clumsy attempt

I guess that the impetus is due to some petrodollars coming from the Khalifa, now that other promoters are complaining, maybe Bernie realizes that he needs the other 18 races to make a championship. Or maybe we could suggest him to better organize a rally tournament crossing the whole Emirates dessert and stop messing with F1.

I believe double points in the final race / races are part of a logical way in which in budget spending can be policed by the sport. Introducing jeopardy in this way force teams to focus budgets on the season in which they are racing rather than diverting to the following season. This is, to me at least, why the announcement of the budget cap for 2015 and double points were made at the same time. They are part of the same strategy! a strategy the bigger teams are likely to oppose. Such as Ferrari, a cash rich team, with double or even triple the budget of other teams. Of course they are against the change because the benefit of having money is reduced.

Yes fans in social media have not responded well to the proposal, but social media does not represent the entire F1 fan base and decisions regarding the future of the sport should not be placed into the hands of armchair enthusiasts (myself included) We do not know the rationale behind the proposal and do not have the information the strategy group used to determine that double points is a credible solution.

Has nothing to do with social media!. Most people who understand F1 don't like it.! It devalues the other Gp's including the history F1 which were always based on equality of all gps - that's why the other circuits are saying - what do you think your doing we spend a fortunate marketing our GP and all of a sudden we are worth half Abu Dhabi in terms of points. If the season us tight people will just say- I will skip the next 2 gps because the winner will be decided at the end!

Well we got rationale - keeping the championship down to the wire. Poor in my opinion.

I would say that the percentage of people not on social media who disagree with this rule is actually likely to be higher, bit only because it is a proxy for age. On the whole younger people use social media and are more liberal when it comes to rule changes... Older people are more conservative in their views "the good old days" and all. Obviously this is a sweeping generalisation, but there is truth in it nevertheless just look at any political polling entity and various economic institution reports.

Anyway your point still stands if people are more against on social media they will definitely be more against overall.

I don't get it. How can F1 continue like this? It is stupid and annoying. It's like there are 20 people wanting to call the shots, and everyone has monster egos, and instead of sitting down behind closed doors to come up with a comprehensive plan they are choosing to air all of their difference via the public airways. Surely, they must be smart people, and they must know how much they are damaging their credibility. My only thought is that we, the average follower, absolutely do not matter. It's an elite club, and we are too dim witted to understand what is required to orchestrate a successful racing series.

We get it. We get that there are serious cost constraints to be considered. We get that F1 is competing for relevance and ratings. We get that F1 is supposed to be the premier racing series in the world. We get it.

So, F1, FIA, whomever, get your head out of your a***s and start talking sense. Because you sound like a bunch of idiots.

I agree, people that dedicate their own time to enjoy a bit of sport are treated like idiots if we just try to follow F1 with any more than a casual interest. It's not new but its forever tiresome.

I bet we all have friends that claim F1 is "just cars going around in circles" and we all argue how much more than that it is. However after this year and the continued way the higher powers insist on ruining a sport and especially after making the fans feel a bit silly for actually caring I've found a new interest.

Turn on a EPL game and the first thing you will see is a big thank you for watching and making the sport what it is.

Formula 1 really needs to decide if it wants people to care. Overall failure is a real possibility, especially when people just lose interest..look at cricket where Pakistan and their match fixing has forever turned me off the game. I don't miss it.

To end this rant on a positive Ill give my 3 top events of this season.

1. Hamilton driving into the Mclaren pits

2. Vettel passing Webber in KL

3. Mclaren giving its fans the year off. (The idea of Ferrari fans having to watch Vettel win 9 races in a row and actually care makes my day)

Finally some common sense regarding the double points issue. The question begs how the resolution even passed unanimously in the first place when it seems now Ferrari and Red Bull ( in the form of Helmut Marko) have let it be known they were NOT in favour in the first place.

Was Bernie holding a financial gun to the heads of the teams, or was he just having a hissy fit and nobody was rude enough to make him aware of the sheer stupidity of his idea?

It's a terrible idea, as is giving the last 3 races double points. Even if it wasn't what is probably the worst track of the season getting double points, I'd still hate it. Hopefully this will be consigned to the same dustbin as the 'medals' idea. Mr Ecclestone did so much good to turn F1 into the sport it is today, but can't help feeling he has had his time. Not only do we have these silly ideas, we also have a ridiculous financial structure where some teams are paid more because of what they did in the past rather than how well they're doing now...F1 is in real danger of sliding down the pan.

Glad to see some sense prevailing on this issue. That said it has served it's purpose of keeping F1 firmly in the headlines during the off season, so bernie and Todt should be congratulated.

If the intention of this ruling is to avoid a runaway championship I'm not convinced this would change anything.

Although I can imagine this will not be popular I'd personally like to see weight added to the leading 5 drivers in the championship, something like 5kg for 5th upto a max of 25kg for the championship leader. This would naturally keep the field tighter throughout the year hopefully preventing a runaway and keeping the midfield cars a little closer to the well funded development driven top teams.

If everyone are opposing it, then who supported it in the meeting? Was it done to please Bernie so that he would yield elsewhere? The reversal of the decision reflects very poorly on FIA and teams themselves.

I cannot imagine what a farce WDC would be if before the last race a driver leading the WDC table by 50 points and crashes with 0 points while the second placed driver wins the race and gets WDC on count-back.

..so, if there was 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 system last year, Vettel would have secured the title in India, getting advantage of 44 points with only 30 to be won. After Japan, he would have had advantage of 34 points with 40 points to be won. So, where's the difference?

It could be so easy: Award one according to the position the drivers finished, one extra for a podium, two extra for the second place, 4 extra for the win.

Makes with 20 cars:

1st: 20+1+4 = 25

2nd: 19+1+2 = 22

3rd: 18+1 = 19

4th: 17

5th: 16

..

last: 1

dnq: 0

To deal with a possible trick of a Toro Rosso missing the last race to prohibit a Ferrari of getting enough points, against a Red Bull, the maximum of "position points" is taken from the number of cars registered in the beginning of the season.

Personally I always liked the motogp pts system. It's run forever and a day. The best rider/bike pretty much always wins title is they win most races and get most podiums. Title fights go down to last race or second last almost always.

All just contrived nonsense to keep people talking about F1 in the period immediately after a fairly boring final half of a season... Only then to be dropped once the new cars start being launched and there are other things to keep F1 in the papers and fans talking/debating.

Good news - maybe cooler heads will prevail One hopes that they heard and listen to the backlash from the fans, but the final sentence in James' piece will most likely explain its hasty departure. In the end it always comes down to money...

I'm really glad the strategy committee are going to reconsider this because it's pointless.i mentioned previously that this would devalue every other GP and not surprised other circuits are saying - you treat us equally or it just won't happen!! Also What happens if we have a really close championship all year between 5 teams separated by only a handful of points ( we hope) and by some luck the sixth team wins the championship by virtue of Bahrain- everyone will be ticked off to no end and turn away from F1. We have so much to look forward to already in 2014 with the new powertrains, there are many things that can be agreed upon to spice things up when things get going-- but not now. Nothing's broke so far- don't fix it!.

I just want to know when the ringmaster will retire or get chewed up by a lion. He's really lost the plot-it's like he has these crazy dreams then goes and tries to tell everyone they should do it. One minute a certain driver is the best then next minute another driver is the best only because everyone in the world is talking about him on social media. He's controlling a tyre co that can't/ won't/ doesn't have the courage to stand up to him. Bernie is as superficial as some of the things that everyone hates about F1. I wish he was back in court dealing with his past rather than a great sports future.

But this double points finish for 'certain' races, sounds like a boondogle, where the weathier race organizers, (eg. anywhere in the Middle East), can pay the money men, (who are getting the vast majority of the money already, while even top tier teams, like Lotus, have to scrounge around getting crashaholic, but fantastically sponsored, PAY DRIVERS); with little or none of it trickling through to the people who really make the spectacle, THE TEAMS!

This has come about because of the fantastic success of one team; and while it is a bit tedious, as fair and square as it gets in Formula One, is at least as fair as Red Bull has won.

Messing with the points system is not a solution to the problem; this 'problem' is being used as yet another method to squeeze more money for the parasites at the top.

Luca has got this one right!

I hope the teams can band together and stop this travesty, it has gone too far!

You mean when Schumacher tried to slam Coulthard in the face ? That was back in 1998 Spa Grandprix. Schumacher comfortably led in the rain until he tried to lap Coulthard who suddenly slowed down causing a crash between them.

If there are to be double points in the last race I think that the constructors should be tied up the race before. Then the final race should be run in equal machinery making it more of a test purley of driver skill getting stronger points for the driver championship. everyone would get a better idea of the favourite talking point - "who is he best driver". However if they were to use an existing supplier they would face massive cost and bias towards there own drivers but what about formula e cars. The race would massivley popular so should help give formula e some much needed exposure and publicity. I wouldn't mind double points in this case, interested in other opinions??

Why not award 1.5 times the points for the 'classic' grand prix? Monaco and Monza both have very different demands to other tracks, and are both from Formula One folk law. If any tracks deserve extra points, it is these too. Maybe throw Spa into the mix also?

James, that's revolutionary, I like that idea. Perhaps it could work and produce classic seasons every now and again, where the winners are they who garner the most points consistently over a season without a single anomalous award of increased points skewing the championship. I think you might be on to something.

I think the traditional races like GB,Germany or Italy are worthy of more importance.Get back to their old classic track layout. Then give the winner 5 or 10 extra points.Because the race becomes more difficult. If someone comes up with this kind of idea I´m willing to give it a chance.

4) Set a maximum budget (excluding wages) for all teams of £50 milion.

5) Allow customer cars.

6) Send Adrian Newey to Mars.

*** Point 3 & 5 = debatable

Maybe allow customer cars, but then restrict that team's budget even further. Actually, scrap that. I enjoy a F1 where Williams and the likes design and go racing with their own blood, sweat and tears.

It's short-sighted. Yes it may make more money at first. But when a single random accident decides a championship and wipes out all the competitive aspects of an entire season, then it will reduce F1's popularity in the future. Also, how do you decide who gets to host the last race? By geography? merit? money? Abu Dhabi may own the last race because they're able & willing to pay more than anyone else.

As an offshoot of this story, maybe you could someday tell us about race fees? Since everyone wants to make the sport more viable for participants, maybe there should also be a cost cap on race fees.

Double points on the last race? Why bother with something so trivial? Give the winner of each race the opportunity to spin a wheel giving them anywhere from .5x to 5x the points. Think of the fun! Do away with skill, make it a championship of chance!

This whole affair makes F1 look fairly amateurish and desperate. Vince McMahon, sorry, Bernie Ecclestone should probably step down as he is clearly out of touch with the fan base. Even the casual fans I know were laughing at this idea!

As it would implemented (last race only AND that race being in Abu Dhabi), the double points idea/rule would be detrimental to the sport and the show. But it could be interesting if it was implemented for more than one venue and those being only the generally more unpredictable races such as Montreal, Spa, Brazil...

Let us all hope that a modicum of reason prevails with respect to this matter. I have an intense dislike for any manipulation of results in the ways that are being suggested and, probably, brought in without any serious thought process.

James, a big thanks for all of this and all the best for Christmas and the New Year. My only wish is that we here, in Melbourne (OZ), get to see and hear a bit more of your reports in our Grand Prix telecasts. Some have been cut off very abruptly.

My normal use car is due for a set of new tyres soon, they will probably be Pirellis, but then, Continental performed mighty well in 1955!

I think it would spice up the competition to reward pole position and fastest race lap with points as they used to in the 1950s (not just trophies). I was ambivalent to the double points in the last race when I first read about it, but I am not surprised at many fans', some of the teams', and some of the race promoters' opposition to it.

Bernie's just trying to keep it fresh and appease a whole lot of business partners,he must have known the double points would never fly. The idea was one way of giving hope to a mid-field team that they could cash in on a few bonus dollars at the end while at the same time spicing up the show for media. Nice try Bern better luck next time.

I had a feeling that most of the audience was against the double points idea. The response from Bernie? Double points for final 3(three!) races. Now that is logical...

It looks like the strategy group wants to turn F1 into regular consumer product, like fast food or/and toilet paper. F1 must be consumable for the masses, for everybody except people really interested in motorsports.

It is funny that the heads of F1 are so desperate for TV figures, but there is no will to solve root causes for real problems. Instead, we get half hearted(and often decade too late) attempts to mask the problems at best. Just a few examples:

1)The negative effects of driving in the turbulence were clear already in the 1970-s, and terribly visible in early 90-s.

"Solution": most visible regulation changes came finally in 2009, but still, tonnes of downforce remained...

2)The differences between the leading teams and backmarkers were huge in late 90-s/early 2000, the races were often unspectacular, cars driving on the rails etc... At the same time, it was believed that some teams could use traction control devices (illegal back then).

"Solution": Expensive gimmick called traction control allowed for almost a decade. It didn't matter that there was already a warning about the possible effects from 1992 and 1993 seasons.

Everybody can easily go on with that list I guess. Whatever they decide this time, I hope that in the future the decision making gets better, more racing and competition oriented.

I'm sure the races we watched were the same:). I guess I didn't express myself too well here. By unspectacular I meant things like racing done mostly in pitlane, 2 team domination and of course the addition of traction control.

But still, I think allowing costly driving aids when the grid is already spread out(both, performance wise and financially) was not the right route.

Another funny thing of late 90-s(say 1998, 1999) is that grooved tyres were introduced. Ten years later: "Oops, we actually need that mechanical grip for better racing!". Glad to hear that the idea of double points is questioned now, not after 10 seasons of banging the head against the wall.

This was always I suspect one of those ideas where someone made a ridiculous comment in a meeting with the defence being "Well come up with something better then" to stimulate debate.

Personally I don't think there is a lot wrong with the current scoring system though do think it could be adjusted slightly. I do feel it swung too much in the favour of first place.

1st getting 7 points more than 2nd is too large a gap. Unfortunately the change coincided with one team investing heavily and dominating and the net result being championship over long before end of season.

I'd propose the following:

1st 20

2nd 18

3rd 14

4th 12

5th 10

6th 8

7th 6

8th 4

9th 2

10th 1

With multiple bonuses for fastest laps.

Fastest lap bonuses would be available at multiple points during a race. Split race distance into three sections eg: laps 1-15, 16-45, 45-70.

Fastest driver in each of those 3 sections of the race earns 1 point for each and the point is applied to the championship immediately the section of the race is completed. ie. If Hamilton clocks the fastest lap in laps 1-15 he gets a point immediately during the race.

These changes would I think still reward first and second without allowing first to run of into the distance and spice up the racing in the beginning, middle and end of a GP.

The thinking behind that was that it would make the drivers fight harder for the win, rather than settling for second a la The Professor. Prior to that there was only 2 points difference between first and second (and second and third) so it didn't make much difference.

On paper it's better now, except in seasons where when one driver keeps winning over and over (not naming anyone).

very bad idea, very "unsporting". they most likely thought it would help and balance the show in case an engine supplier gets it better than the other two, and vice verse. they must expect a lot of engine related DNFs, and double points could rescue a championship at the end for one of the top teams.

Yes people complained in 2009 with the funny looking cars with the wrong-sized wings, and then again in 2012 with the funny looking platypus noses, but in 2014 with F1 cars that may or may not have a probiscus? No chance 😉

F1, the "pinnacle of Motorsports", is also the pinnacle of bad ideas; from the staged podiums and the disintegrating tyres to the idiotic DRS and now the unbelievable double points. By some miraculous reason we didn't end up with the medals, the sprinklers or the shortcuts also!

It's almost like Bernie and the people who for some reason buy into his schemes have made their goal to destroy F1.

The sad part is that I, like many other fans, keep watching in the hope that 'the next race' or 'next year' things will be better.

The danger of past years became unacceptable; good, but when are these moronic gimmicks going to be unacceptable too?

If the Abu Dhabi race was a success with double points then there could be, say 4 double points races in 2015 and if a promoter wanted a double points race then they would be bidding against each other.

Suggesting change in this sport always has its critics but from my perspective change has been excellent for F1. We only have to look at the early 2000's to see that the aerodynamic limitations on overtaking was causing a series of processional races. DRS and KERS has been positive for the sport (yes I know there are some that don't like this - but that is a different debate).

You only have to look at the cars each year over the last 40 years to know that change is the only thing consistent in F1. Changes should be debated and discussed openly. Not all ideas will be good and in actual fact this one is classically bad. You only have to look to the last 10 years and reflect on those championships that were decided in the last race.

The fact that the points system is consistent adds to the special nature of those championships. It is this fact which makes the Rai, Ham and Vet championship memorable.

This change to the points system is clearly designed to increase these 'memorable' finishes and to make constructors continue trying through the tail end of the year. But the change will dilute those championships which were won in the final race. It will add a level of glitz that would remove the shine of those memorable championships.

Having said all that we should still embrace the discussion of change. Yes there will be bad ideas but there will also be good ones (say Austin) or ideas we should try and find out if they work (ie New York race!)

The truth is that most people overreact, believing that they can imagine and judge how this new rule would affect the championships, but in fact they cannot. You cannot unless you try it out. People are afraid of admitting how uncertain the world is, but it is. Closing your eyes and believing that you can understand how changes like this will affect the championships is just pure vanity. Still, in this uncertainty bernie's idea for 3 grand prix seems to make more sense than this rule to try out.

Double points are not the problem or solution. The problem is we spend all weekend getting the fastest cars to the front and the slower cars to the rear that the fastest guys all run away with it. Mix up Qually with different formats at different rounds or give the top 10 super super soft Qually tyres for Q3. Mix up the grid and mix up the results, or at least make guys in the best cars earn it not just drive away from pole all the time.

I'm not too fussed about more stuffing about with the wdc, but it would be nice to see some ideas to recognise the effort all the way down the field for the constructors. How about a prize pool of $50million each plus a dollar for each point they score all the way down to the last car home. Should balance out the field a bit over time.

I have been a fan and attend F1 GP for many years. I am getting very tired of the attempts to "revitalise" the pure contest of F1. Sure I have noticed the changes. Things like DRS, poor short-life tyres and now double points (you can't be serious!). F1 is getting too artificial for me and may I say many of my associates (and their adult children).

Bernie is laughing his head off, no one is talking about courts or Medien or Germany.

The double points for last race keeps the championship alive until later.

However in the spirit of giving and Ferrari's inbuilt advantages in rule making and finance, how about giving Ferrari a couple of extra points per race as well? I am sure Luca will find it entirely justified as he seems to be running F1 now instead of the FIA.

I think the fia and bernie should step back and take note of what the fans want. We want racing. No gimmicks. Get rid of drs, kers, ers, all the BS. Remove the rev limiters, so what if engines blow up?? Thats what I miss seeing in F1!! Give them smaller tyres and a choice of suppliers. Bring back re-fueling! Maybe switch to E98 ethanol as its a bio fuel and proven to make BIG HP. We want stuff like this! Bernie, are you reading?

why dont they dish out points for pole position and fastest lap? it would make going for them worthwhile for teams instead of playing it safe for a race strategy. Fastest race lap especially could help some midfield teams with late pitstops in an attempt to get some points out of races they are not doing well in.

Well if they're going to do double points then it had better be at a great track where they can actually race each other, not at a place where it's usually decided in the last 2 minutes of Q3 and then the race is just a parade. 50 points awarded for one lap!

I've been an an F1 fan for years but if the double points for the last race comes in I'll stop watching. The concept is a joke. Does Bernie think we are mugs ? It's just like the Premier League with their 39th game. The fans will leave in droves if the basics are compromised by marketing.